• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Pope Saint Paul VI (3 April 1969): “Although the text of the Roman Gradual—at least that which concerns the singing—has not been changed, the Entrance antiphons and Communions antiphons have been revised for Masses without singing.”

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
    • Jeff’s Mom Joins Fundraiser
  • Pew Resources
    • Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal
    • Jogues Illuminated Missal
    • KYRIALE • Saint Antoine Daniel
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Repository • “Spanish Music”
    • Ordinary Form Feasts (Sainte-Marie)
  • MUSICAL WEBSITES
    • René Goupil Gregorian Chant
    • Noël Chabanel Psalms
    • Nova Organi Harmonia (2,279 pages)
    • Roman Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Catechism of Gregorian Rhythm
    • Father Enemond Massé Manuscripts
    • Lalemant Polyphonic
  • Miscellaneous
    • Site Map
    • Secrets of the Conscientious Choirmaster
    • “Wedding March” for lazy organists
    • Emporium Kevin Allen
    • Saint Jean de Lalande Library
    • Sacred Music Symposium 2023
    • The Eight Gregorian Modes
    • Gradual by Pothier’s Protégé
    • Seven (7) Considerations
Views from the Choir Loft

Is Investment in Sacred Music Really Necessary?

Dr. Samuel Backman · September 19, 2024

S A STUDENT OF MUSIC, I was frequently plagued with a sense of anxiety that the work I had set about was a disposable “extra” or nicety. It seemed to me that, while society would be crippled without farmers, physicians, construction workers, or engineers, there would be no such impact felt in the absence of musicians.1 One can survive only a short period of time without food, water, or medicine, I thought, but who knows how many years one could survive without live music! Furthermore, these thoughts were corroborated by many attitudes found in various corners of educational institutions. When universities face budgetary crises, music departments tend to be among the earliest casualties.

No Frills • In an ironic sense, my fear that the arts were disposable “extras” was spawned, in many ways, by certain trends in the fine arts themselves. The utilitarian ideologies that produced the Bauhaus and Brutalist movements have likewise engendered suspicion against any decorative elements that might adorn the raw material of the building. While this aesthetic philosophy can be understood as a reaction to some of the excesses of architecture in the preceding nineteenth century, it carried with a rejection of the “non-essential” or “decorative” elements not only in architecture, but in society writ large.

Waste Not, Want Not • It is no secret that the Church, in many quarters, was likewise plagued with tepidity toward beauty. One might indeed ask: if the Church exists for the salvation of souls, one might wonder, why spend so much money building beautiful churches and outfitting them with beautiful statuary and other furnishing? There is a temptation in our profit-driven, efficiency-driven climate to view the beautification of the liturgy as a sort of squandering or folly. From a more altruistic or noble vantagepoint, we might be tempted to view such beautification in a negative light for fear that it might lead us to neglect the poor needy. But, lest we think the pursuit of beauty in the worship of God is a waste, let us not forget the Judas Iscariot made this same accusation of Mary, sister of Lazarus, as she began to anoint Jesus’ feet with perfume: “Why was this oil not sold for three hundred days’ wages and given to the poor?” (John 12:5)

Judas’ Misreading of the Situation • At face value, Judas’ quip with Mary’s action might seem perfectly justified: think of how many people we could feed we sold that oil rather than pouring it out! Nevertheless, it is not Mary’s “frivolous” gesture the Jesus rebukes, but rather Judas’ reply. Here, Judas falls short is in his underestimation of the power and generosity of Jesus, who fed five thousand through the multiplication of loaves and fishes. It is not Jesus’ charity that is lacking, but Judas’ faith.

“Both/And” vs. “Either/Or” • There is a general tendency in Christian theology to reject the notion of “either/or” statements, but rather to favor “both/and” statements: Jesus Christ is both human and divine, God is both merciful and just, Mary is both virgin and mother, etc. Following suit, we are called both to give generously to the poor and to offer our first fruits in the right worship of Almighty God. And our God who has given us these duties will also provide us—or, has already provided us—the means to do both, for our God is a God of abundance and not of scarcity. It is our duty, as Christians to feed the poor and care for the sick, and it is no less our duty to offer God our first fruits through the act of Divine Worship.

Right Worship AND Care for the Poor • While the Corporal Works of Mercy (i.e. feeding the poor, sheltering the homeless, etc.) are a central part of our duty as Christians, the Church is by no means the only institution capable of doing such. However, when it comes to offering a foretaste of the heavenly banquet in liturgical worship, here, the Church has a unique “core competency.” While it is true that the Sacred Liturgy is, first and foremost a gift that is received from God rather than produced by man, it is important that we offer our first fruits through the act of Divine Worship, as this is the action to which we aspire for eternity. In heaven, the need for the Corporal Works of Mercy will cease, as there will no longer be any suffering to relieve. However, the spirit of charity in which these works are offered will live on in eternity through the act of Divine Worship, when we join the angelic hosts as foreseen by the prophet Isaiah: “Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Hosts, heaven and earth are full of your glory.” (Isaiah 6:3)

The Liturgy: A Rehearsal For Heaven • The act of liturgical worship can be understood to be a kind of “rehearsal” for eternal worship of Almighty God in heaven. For this reason, the cultivation of Sacred Music is not an “extra” or a frivolity, but something central to our mission. Though the way that it is cultivated will differ greatly on the basis of location and resources, the purpose for which it is cultivated is a common thread throughout the whole Church: namely, to make the heavenly kingdom tangible even in our earthly sojourn.

“And All These Things Will Be Given You Besides” • In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus advises the crowds to “seek first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness,” and our earthly needs “will be given to [us] also.” (Matthew 6:33) Applying this passage to the cultivation of Sacred Music, I have seen it play out in so many different settings. It is no doubt a leap of faith for any parish to invest their already thinly-spread resources in this pursuit. However, the return on this investment is often substantial. I’ve heard colleagues cite the axiom the “a good music program pays for itself.” While I am not prepared to scientifically defend this from an actuarial standpoint, I have seen it play out time and again in practice! It goes without saying that we come to Mass for the Sacrament rather than the music, but nevertheless, our encounter with the Sacrament can and should be enriched by the presence of music. In many ways, a parish’s vitality (or lack thereof) is manifested in its approach to sacred music.

Covid, Livestreams, and the Unwavering Primacy of Divine Worship • I would like to conclude with a personal testimony of how an investment in sacred music—in a very uncertain time—paid off. As the year 2019 came to a close, who could have foreseen the events that would unfold in the first quarter of 2020. I, for one, would never have anticipated that our church buildings would be closed to the public, but so it was. In our city and diocese, we were allowed to have no more the ten people present in the building for the celebration of Holy Mass. Although we were not equipped with a livestream setup prior to the pandemic, we learned “on the fly” and garnered the necessary equipment to host a livestream. While many livestreams of Masses during this period took place within the confines of a small chapel (or office) with only a priest and cameraman, we made a commitment to having an organist and four (socially distanced) singers present for each livestream. Although congregational singing was prohibited, we furnished each Mass with polyphony, Gregorian Propers, and organ music. On the other side of the building, we always had as many altar servers as legally possible and continued to use incense. In short, we did not want to skimp on the act of Divine Worship, even though the circumstances were unusual.

About a year later, when many restrictions had been lifted and people came to Mass in person again, we saw quite an influx of new faces come into our parish. When asked how they found us at Holy Cross Catholic Church, many individuals cited that the livestreams provided them a sense of beauty and reverence that had been sorely missing in their lives at this time. I remain deeply thankful for the support and shared vision of the clergy and other leadership in our parish for their commitment to keeping sacred music a central component in this trying time. If ever there were a time where one was tempted to regard sacred music as a “frivolity,” this was it. Nevertheless, it proved to be a stalwart beacon of God’s constancy amid. Though our earthly lives are wrought with ebbs and flows, peaks and troughs, we must remember that the angelic choirs never cease to exclaim: “Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Hosts, heaven and earth are full of your glory.”

1 I don’t need to remind the readers of this blog about how our government would later divide Americans into “essential” and “non-essential” workers.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles Last Updated: September 19, 2024

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

About Dr. Samuel Backman

Samuel earned degrees at Saint Olaf College, Yale University, and the University of Oklahoma. He resides with his wife in Minneapolis, Minnesota.—(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
    EARS BEFORE truly revolutionary changes were introduced by the post-conciliar reformers, Evelyn Waugh wrote (on 16 August 1964) to John Cardinal Heenan: “I think that a vociferous minority has imposed itself on the hierarchy and made them believe that a popular demand existed where there was in fact not even a preference.” We ask the kind reader— indeed, we beg you—to realize that those of us born in the 1940s and 1950s had no cognizance of Roman activities during the 1960s and 1970s. We were concerned with making sure we had the day’s bus fare, graduating from high school, taking care of our siblings, learning a trade, getting a job, courting a spouse. We questioned neither the nuns nor the Church.1 Do not believe for one instant any of us were following the liturgical machinations of Cardinal Lercaro or Father Bugnini in real time. Setting The Stage • To never question or resist Church authorities is praiseworthy. On the other hand, when a scandalous situation persists for decades, it must be brought into focus. Our series will do precisely that as we discuss the Lectionary Scandal from a variety of angles. We don’t do this to attack the Catholic Church. Our goal is bringing to light what’s been going on, so it can be fixed once and for all. Our subject is extremely knotty and difficult to navigate. Its complexity helps explain why the situation has persisted for such a long time.2 But if we immediately get “into the weeds” we’ll lose our audience. Therefore, it seems better to jump right in. So today, we’ll explore the legality of selling these texts. A Word On Copyright • Suppose Susie modifies a paragraph by Edgar Allan Poe. That doesn’t mean ipso facto she can assert copyright on it. If Susie takes a picture of a Corvette and uses Photoshop to color the tires blue, that doesn’t mean she henceforth “owns” all Corvettes in America. But when it comes to Responsorial Psalm translations, certain parties have been asserting copyright over them, selling them for a profit, and bullying publishers vis-à-vis hymnals and missals. Increasingly, Catholics are asking whether these translations are truly under copyright—because they are identical (or substantially identical) to other translations.3 Example After Example • Our series will provide copious examples supporting our claims. Sometimes we’ll rely on the readership for assistance, because—as we’ve stressed—our subject’s history couldn’t be more convoluted. There are countless manuscripts (in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin) we don’t have access to, so it would be foolish for us to claim that our observations are somehow the ‘final word’ on anything. Nevertheless, we demand accountability. Catholics in the pews are the ones who paid for all this. We demand to know who specifically made these decisions (which impact every English-speaking Catholic) and why specifically certain decisions were made. The Responsorial Psalms used in America are—broadly speaking—stolen from the hard work of others. In particular, they borrowed heavily from Father Cuthbert Lattey’s 1939 PSALTER TRANSLATION:
    *  PDF Download • COMPARISON CHART —We thank the CCW staff for technical assistance with this graph.
    Analysis • Although certain parties have been selling (!!!) that translation for decades, the chart demonstrates it’s not a candidate for copyright since it “borrows” or “steals” or “rearranges” so much material from other translations, especially the 1939 translation by Father Cuthbert Lattey. What this means in layman’s terms is that individuals have been selling a translation under false pretenses, a translation they don’t own (although they claim to). To make RESTITUTION, all that money will have to be returned. A few years ago, the head of ICEL gave a public speech in which he said they give some of “their” profits to the poor. While almsgiving is a good thing, it cannot justify theft. Our Constant Theme • Our series will be held together by one thread, which will be repeated constantly: “Who was responsible?” Since 1970, the conduct of those who made a profit by selling these sacred texts has been repugnant. Favoritism was shown toward certain entities—and we will document that with written proof. It is absolutely essential going forward that the faithful be told who is making these decisions. Moreover, vague justifications can no longer be accepted. If we’re told they are “making the translations better,” we must demand to know what specifically they’re doing and what specific criteria they’re following. Stay Tuned • If you’re wondering whether we’ll address the forthcoming (allegedly) Lectionary and the so-called ABBEY PSALMS AND CANTICLES, have no fear. We’ll have much to say about both. Please stay tuned. We believe this will end up being the longest series of articles ever submitted to Corpus Christi Watershed. To be continued. ROBERT O’NEILL Former associate of Monsignor Francis “Frank” P. Schmitt at Boys Town in Nebraska JAMES ARNOLD Formerly associated w/ King’s College, Cambridge A convert to the Catholic Church, and distant relative of J. H. Arnold MARIA B. Currently serves as a musician in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte. Those aware of the situation in her diocese won’t be surprised she chose to withhold her last name.
    1 Even if we’d been able to obtain Roman journals such as NOTITIAE, none of them contained English translations. But such an idea would never have occurred to a high school student or a college student growing up in the 1960s. 2 A number of shell corporations claim to own the various biblical translations mandated for Roman Catholics. They’ve made millions of dollars selling (!) these indulgenced texts. If time permits, we hope to enumerate these various shell corporations and explain: which texts they claim to own; how much they bring in each year; who runs them; and so forth. It would also be good to explore the morality of selling these indulgenced texts for a profit. Furthermore, for the last fifty years these organizations have employed several tactics to manipulate and bully others. If time permits, we will expose those tactics (including written examples). Some of us—who have been working on this problem for three decades—have amassed written documentation we’ll be sharing that demonstrates behavior at best “shady” and at worst criminal. 3 Again, we are not yet examining the morality of selling (!) indulgenced texts to Catholics mandated to use those same translations.
    —Guest Author
    “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
    Some have expressed interest in perusing the ORDER OF MUSIC I prepared for the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time (27 July 2025). If such a thing interests you, feel free to download it as a PDF file. As always, the Responsorial Psalm, Gospel Acclamation, and Mass Propers for this Sunday are conveniently stored at the the feasts website.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
    All of the chants for 27 July 2025 have been added to the feasts website, as usual under a convenient “drop down” menu. The COMMUNION ANTIPHON (both text and melody) are exceedingly beautiful and ancient.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    Pope Pius XII Hymnal?
    Have you ever heard of the Pope Pius XII Hymnal? It’s a real book, published in the United States in 1959. Here’s a sample page so you can verify with your own eyes it existed.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    “Hybrid” Chant Notation?
    Over the years, many have tried to ‘simplify’ plainsong notation. The O’Fallon Propers attempted to simplify the notation—but ended up making matters worse. Dr. Karl Weinmann tried to do the same in the time of Pope Saint Pius X by replacing each porrectus. You can examine a specimen from his edition and see whether you agree he complicated matters. In particular, look at what he did with éxsules fílii Hévae.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    Antiphons Don’t Match?
    A reader wants to know why the Entrance and Communion antiphons in certain publications deviate from what’s prescribed by the GRADUALE ROMANUM published after Vatican II. Click here to read our answer. The short answer is: the Adalbert Propers were never intended to be sung. They were intended for private Masses only (or Masses without music). The “Graduale Parvum,” published by the John Henry Newman Institute of Liturgical Music in 2023, mostly uses the Adalbert Propers—but sometimes uses the GRADUALE text: e.g. Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul (29 June).
    —Corpus Christi Watershed

Random Quote

“To treat harmony and rhythm in this matter was a difficult matter. Facing numerous problems both large and small—that arose constantly—we understood that a flawless harmonization of Gregorian chant cannot be created by improvisation, no matter the competence and ability of the organist or harmonist.”

— ‘Mons. Jules Van Nuffel, NOH Preface’

Recent Posts

  • PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
  • “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
  • Flor Peeters In A Weird Mood?
  • Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
  • Jeff’s Mother Joins Our Fundraiser

Subscribe

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2025 Corpus Christi Watershed · Isaac Jogues on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.

The election of Pope Leo XIV has been exciting, and we’re filled with hope for our apostolate’s future!

But we’re under pressure to transfer our website to a “subscription model.”

We don’t want to do that. We believe our website should remain free to all.

Our president has written the following letter:

President’s Message (dated 30 May 2025)

Are you able to support us?

clock.png

Time's up